Re: [foxboro] FoxView - FoxDraw using 16:9 or 16:10 aspect ratios - any progress?
- From: "Kinsinger, Matthew R" <mkinsinger@xxxxxxx>
- To: "foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 13:08:42 -0400
The new Version of FVFD you need at V8.8 includes it. Not sure of the pre 8.8
versions that act the same way. Just a caveat, displays modified in the new
FVFD are not readable in most of the old FVFD versions. So if you have multiple
versions running in the plant, you need to be careful where you make changes to
send to older areas.
Matt Kinsinger
mkinsinger@xxxxxxx
330-825-1208
-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Russ Kaiser
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 11:41 AM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [foxboro] FoxView - FoxDraw using 16:9 or 16:10 aspect ratios - any
progress?
I haven't been too attentive for the last year. Has there been any progress
for the support of truly utilizing wide screen displays using
FoxView/FoxDraw?
Russ
>-----Original Message-----
>From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Corey R Clingo
>Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 11:46 AM
>To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [foxboro] 23" widescreen monitor announcement -
>customer request
>
>Just got this today: "I/A Series Customer Notification
>2012014abi: 23-Inch Flat panel Monitor for Unix and Windows"
>Evidently, Foxboro is introducing a widescreen monitor, and apparently
>(finally!) modifying Foxview to somehow take advantage of it
>(maybe someone from Foxboro can comment on this).
>
>OK, so here's my problem. Instead of using an aspect ratio
>that most power users of PCs use (16:10 or 1920x1200), they
>chose one that people who watch DVDs on their computers use
>(16:9 or 1920x1080). I know those "full-HD" ones are more
>popular, and cheaper, but the fact that I can no longer get a
>laptop with a 1920x1200 resolution drives me up a wall**; that
>extra vertical screen space is quite helpful in many
>applications. In addition, the so-called high-performance HMIs
>tend to use every available pixel on a screen, so the more the better.
>
>Now, Foxboro, if you are going to go to the effort of
>modifying Foxview, please DO IT RIGHT and make it so the
>viewable area/workspace is configurable (asymmetric
>auto-scaling does NOT count), rather than being fixed to one
>or two particular workspace sizes. Maybe that is the plan, but
>I didn't glean that from the announcement. At least that way
>we can substitute our own 1920x1200, or 2560x1600, or whatever
>monitors if the el-cheapo standard 1920x1080s won't do for us.
>While you're at it, I'd love it if you would do this with the
>Alarm Managers as well.
>
>OK, end of my rant. How do the rest of you guys feel about this?
>
>Corey
>
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
foxboro mailing list: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
foxboro mailing list: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
Other related posts:
